Updated results from the skin cancer cohorts from an ongoing phase 1/2 multicohort study of RP1, an enhanced potency oncolytic HSV, combined with nivolumab (IGNYTE).
Authors: Mohammed M. Milhem, Ari M. Vanderwalde, Tawnya Lynn Bowles, Joseph J. Sacco, Jiaxin Niu, Katy K. Tsai, Jason Alan Chesney, Bartosz Chmielowski, Adel Samson, Terence Duane Rhodes, Gino Kim In, Anna C. Pavlick, Trisha Michel Wise-Draper, Miguel F. Sanmamed, Praveen Bommareddy, Junhong Zhu, Robert S. Coffin, Kevin Joseph Harrington, Mark R. Middleton
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2022)

9553 Background: RP1 is an enhanced potency oncolytic version of HSV1 that expresses human GM-CSF and the fusogenic protein GALV-GP R-. IGNYTE is a multicohort phase 1/2 study that evaluates the safety and efficacy of RP1 in combination with nivo (NCT03767348) in a range of tumor types. Preliminary data demonstrated a durable anti-tumor activity and tolerability for RP1+nivo. Here, we present updated results from the initial and melanoma (mel) and anti-PD1 naïve non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) cohorts with RP1+nivo. Methods: RP1 is administered via intratumoral injection Q2W, up to 10 mL/visit, first alone at a dose of 10 6 PFU/mL and then starting with the 2 nd dose at 10 7 PFU/mL in combination with nivo (240 mg IV Q2W for 4 months (mos) then 480 mg IV Q4W up to 2 yrs) for up to 8 doses, with the option to re-initiate RP-1. Eligible patients (pts) must have at least one measurable &amp; injectable tumor of ≥ 1 cm, ECOG 0-1, and no prior oncolytic therapy. For mel, both anti-PD1 naïve and failed pts were eligible, for NMSC pts who were anti-PD1 naïve. Results: As of data extraction on January 31, 2022, 13/36 pts with mel (36.1%) and 19/31 pts with NMSC (61.3%) had a best response of PR or CR. For mel this was 5/8 (62.5%), 6/16 (37.5%), 0/6 and 2/6 (33.3%) for pts with anti-PD1 naïve cutaneous, anti-PD1/anti-PD1+anti-CTLA-4 failed cutaneous, uveal and mucosal mel respectively. For the anti-PD1 naïve NMSC this included 11/17 (64.7%), 1/4 (25%), 3/4 (75%) and 4/6 (66.6%) patients with CSCC, BCC, MCC and angiosarcoma respectively, including 8/17 (47.1%) being CR for CSCC. Current immature median DOR was 13.27 mos (current range 3.67-16.93 mos) for mel, and 7.32 mos (current range 1.88-23.11mos) for anti-PD1 naïve NMSC. Any grade TEAE ( &gt; 25%) in all cohorts combined were fatigue, nausea, pyrexia, chills, diarrhoea, pruritus, and influenza-like illness. TEAE ≥grade 3 ( &gt; 5%) were disease progression and fatigue. No deaths related to RP1 was observed, with one death related to nivo (myocarditis). Biomarker data from paired biopsies indicated robust T cell infiltration and an increase in tumor inflammation gene signature post-treatment. Clinical responses observed were independent of baseline tumor PD-L1 expression status. Conclusions: RP1 in combination with nivo provides a durable anti-tumor activity in pts with skin cancers, including anti-PD1 failed and anti-PD1/anti-CTLA-4 failed mel. The combination continued to be generally well tolerated with no new safety signals identified. Based on this data, enrollment into both a registration-directed cohort of pts who have anti-PD1 failed cutaneous mel (n = 125) and a cohort of pts with anti-PD1 failed NMSC (n = 30) is ongoing. Up-to-date data from this ongoing trial will be reported at the conference. A randomized Ph2 trial of RP1+cemiplimab vs. cemiplimab alone in anti-PD1 naïve NMSC is also underway (NCT04050436). Clinical trial information: NCT03767348.